Howdy everyone!
So I decided to spin up an instance of DigitalOcean Singapore and Vultr Japan to see which one truly kicks more butt for Asia! (Or in my case... for me). This may look like a review, but its not meant to be a review (probably because I just got this and believe a true review would require a few months of usage and interaction with the support staff).
Let's get this rolling!
DigitalOcean - Singapore
DigitalOcean Singapore is located in Equinix's Singapore facility (or so as their blog post states here), but it seems they're not using Equinix's network blend there because it's incredibly lacking. Either way, network to me (Korea) from their Singapore Datacenter is around 120ms during peak hours and 100ms during regular hours.
Here's the serverbear benchmark: http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2014/03/06/l112zUCMCPYolGFU
Vultr - Japan
Vultr's backed by Choopa and is in their Tokyo Datacenter location (didn't really try to look for specific information behind it). I'm not too sure specifically what their network blend is nor did I really spend the time to look it up further than a simple bgp lookup. For my uses (to Korea), I think they just plain screwed up the routing because my traces goes from Korea to Los Angeles (Level3) then Los Angeles (NTT) to Tokyo.
Here's the serverbear benchmark: http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2014/03/06/9vEoPjgVAg1OOokC (Ignore how it says DigitalOcean, I entered Vultr but it just didn't seem to accept it and think it was DigitalOcean)
Comparison
Hardware
They're all 1 CPU with 40GB HDD, but the CPU for Vultr seems to be better as it received higher unixbench ratings and was also clocked at 3.4 GHz (in comparison to DigitalOcean's 2.0GHz CPU).
IO Vultr is better but my assumption is that I'm on an unpopulated Vultr server in comparison to DO's already-filled/full server. Regardless, not a big issue at the moment because I have way more than I'll ever need for both companies.
Network
Now... this is where it bothers me. Vultr should technically have better network to me because it's RIGHT THERE next to me. Unfortunately, Vultr has the worst network to me. DigitalOcean and Vultr though seems to have a decent connection in the country they're located in, and their network internationally seems to be a big "Ehhhhhhhh". Vultr does have a faster route to Cachefly than DigitalOcean though.
Conclusion
This isn't supposed to be a review, it was supposed to be a simple comparison and presentation of information (especially since I just got this and I immediately ran this test). DO seems to have a better network for my uses but Vultr seems to have better hardware (or at least better per VM).
So here's the discussion part, does anyone see Vultr beating DO? Anyone see it as a good alternative for Asia in general?
So I decided to spin up an instance of DigitalOcean Singapore and Vultr Japan to see which one truly kicks more butt for Asia! (Or in my case... for me). This may look like a review, but its not meant to be a review (probably because I just got this and believe a true review would require a few months of usage and interaction with the support staff).
Let's get this rolling!
DigitalOcean - Singapore
DigitalOcean Singapore is located in Equinix's Singapore facility (or so as their blog post states here), but it seems they're not using Equinix's network blend there because it's incredibly lacking. Either way, network to me (Korea) from their Singapore Datacenter is around 120ms during peak hours and 100ms during regular hours.
Here's the serverbear benchmark: http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2014/03/06/l112zUCMCPYolGFU
Vultr - Japan
Vultr's backed by Choopa and is in their Tokyo Datacenter location (didn't really try to look for specific information behind it). I'm not too sure specifically what their network blend is nor did I really spend the time to look it up further than a simple bgp lookup. For my uses (to Korea), I think they just plain screwed up the routing because my traces goes from Korea to Los Angeles (Level3) then Los Angeles (NTT) to Tokyo.
Here's the serverbear benchmark: http://serverbear.com/benchmark/2014/03/06/9vEoPjgVAg1OOokC (Ignore how it says DigitalOcean, I entered Vultr but it just didn't seem to accept it and think it was DigitalOcean)
Comparison
Hardware
They're all 1 CPU with 40GB HDD, but the CPU for Vultr seems to be better as it received higher unixbench ratings and was also clocked at 3.4 GHz (in comparison to DigitalOcean's 2.0GHz CPU).
IO Vultr is better but my assumption is that I'm on an unpopulated Vultr server in comparison to DO's already-filled/full server. Regardless, not a big issue at the moment because I have way more than I'll ever need for both companies.
Network
Now... this is where it bothers me. Vultr should technically have better network to me because it's RIGHT THERE next to me. Unfortunately, Vultr has the worst network to me. DigitalOcean and Vultr though seems to have a decent connection in the country they're located in, and their network internationally seems to be a big "Ehhhhhhhh". Vultr does have a faster route to Cachefly than DigitalOcean though.
Conclusion
This isn't supposed to be a review, it was supposed to be a simple comparison and presentation of information (especially since I just got this and I immediately ran this test). DO seems to have a better network for my uses but Vultr seems to have better hardware (or at least better per VM).
So here's the discussion part, does anyone see Vultr beating DO? Anyone see it as a good alternative for Asia in general?
